Justice or revenge?

As a hostage in Beirut, Terry Waite was chained to a wall, beaten and denied all human rights. Here he gives his thoughts on America's treatment of the al-Qaida detainees in Guantanamo Bay

I can recognise the conditions that prisoners are being kept in at the US camp at Guantanamo Bay because I have been there. Not to Cuba's Camp X-Ray, but to the darkened cell in Beirut that I occupied for five years. I was chained to a wall by my hands and feet; beaten on the soles of my feet with cable; denied all my human rights, and contact with my family for five years, and given no access to the outside world. Because I was kept in very similar conditions, I am appalled at the way we - countries that call ourselves civilised - are treating these captives. Is this justice or revenge?

I was determined that my five years in captivity would not break me, and they didn't. But I cannot say that it was easy. The hardest thing for a prisoner in those conditions is the uncertainty. You don't know what will happen to you next: you have no rights, no one to speak to, no one to advise you, no one to fall back on. You only have your own resources. These men, who may or may not be guilty, will be experiencing that sense of isolation and dislocation.

For four years I was kept in solitary confinement and had no companionship at all. I was always blindfolded, or had to wear a blindfold when someone came into the room. I never saw another human being. The initial effect is eerie, but eventually you become accustomed to it. You learn to live from within. But that's tough, and no one should be forced to attempt it.

I had a diet very similar to that being given to these men - bread, cream cheese, rice, beans. I was adequately fed, but not luxuriously, and I lost a lot of weight. The greatest difficulty was never having any exercise in the whole period. I had to get what exercise I could while chained to the wall. I had five minutes a day to go to the bathroom; for the rest of the time I had to use a bottle. The conditions were inhuman, but all the time I had to assert my humanity. What I experienced makes me all the more determined when I say that prisoners of whatever description must be treated humanely and justly. I would stand up for the rights of the alleged terrorist and of any other individual facing serious charges. I am not soft on terrorism - I have had too many dealings with it to be so - but I am passionate that we must observe standards of justice. I fear that unless firm action is taken to institute just and fair procedures, the long-term results for the US will be catastrophic. Terrorism is not ultimately defeated by the force of arms; you have to deal with the root causes and ask what makes people act in such extreme ways.

It alarms me greatly that the prisoners' status seems to have been determined almost exclusively by the US president and his advisers. Their status should be determined by an independent tribunal. The US seems to be making up the rules as it goes along. First, it said that the appalling acts of terrorism in New York and Washington were acts of war; now it is saying that these captives are not in fact prisoners of war, that they are unlawful combatants. An independent tribunal should establish precisely what they are.

If the US is making up the rules, it will have no moral authority should other countries try, convict and perhaps execute American and European suspects. There will be no moral grounds on which we can stand if we allow this to continue. Americans tell me that they have little patience with international tribunals - they take a long time, and often come up with a different result from that which was hoped. But that is no argument. It doesn't matter how long it takes - justice must be seen to be done, and be done impartially.

I was appalled when I heard a prominent American suggest that in certain circumstances the limited use of torture might be justified. That is a dreadful statement to come from a civilised nation. Torture can never be justified, and must be clearly condemned. When it comes to trial, these men are entitled to basic defence rights and ought to be tried under the auspices of the UN. It is vital that we uphold standards of international law for the protection of the innocent, and for the protection of American or European subjects who may find themselves in difficult circumstances in the future. For once, morality and pragmatism go hand in hand.

· Terry Waite is the former special envoy to the Archbishop of Canterbury. He was held captive by terrorists in Beirut from 1987 to 1991.

"Because I was kept in very similar conditions, I am appalled at the way we - countries that call ourselves civilised - are treating these captives. Is this justice or revenge? "
"The US seems to be making up the rules as it goes along. First, it said that the appalling acts of terrorism in New York and Washington were acts of war; now it is saying that these captives are not in fact prisoners of war, that they are unlawful combatants. "
"If the US is making up the rules, it will have no moral authority should other countries try, convict and perhaps execute American and European suspects. There will be no moral grounds on which we can stand if we allow this to continue."

"I was appalled when I heard a prominent American suggest that in certain circumstances the limited use of torture might be justified. That is a dreadful statement to come from a civilised nation. Torture can never be justified, and must be clearly condemned. When it comes to trial, these men are entitled to basic defence rights and ought to be tried under the auspices of the UN. It is vital that we uphold standards of international law for the protection of the innocent, and for the protection of American or European subjects who may find themselves in difficult circumstances in the future. For once, morality and pragmatism go hand in hand. "

He was not kept in similar conditions.

But, the prisoners are indeed P.O.W.'s, prisoners of war.

However, their status as prisoners of war does not excuse them from criminal charges --- piracy, terrorism --- which can and may be brought against them.

The restraint the P.O.W.'s are under, respects their known behavior.

For further information, see / study the events of the failures of the U.N. forces' management of North Korean and Red Chinese P.O.W.'s during the Korean War --- the failure to properly restrain, and indeed, "humane treatement" dreamed up by people comfortably NOT ON THE SCENE, resulted in the communist P.O.W.'s considerably well-organized destruction of U.N. lives and thence some of said prisoners.

Mr. Waite's experience --- the restraint of him --- was not because he posed an offensive threat; rather, he was held and tortured for the purpose of being held and tortured in and of itself.

The P.O.W.'s in Cuba, are being restrained, actually with considerable care, for benefit of both the captors' and the prisoners' lives.

This guy doesn't have a clue. He spouts nothing, but socialist dribble supporting and promoting "independent" UN authority over the whole matter.

"Terrorism is not ultimately defeated by the force of arms; you have to deal with the root causes and ask what makes people act in such extreme ways."

BS! They can only be defeated by force. The root cause of their murderous acts is the desire to dominate others. It's the same root cause, or motivation, behind this piece by T. Waite, the UN and all the other socialist orgs. All these folks refuse to let up with their plans until submission and tribute are given them, or they are defeated and rendered harmless.

"was not because he posed an offensive threat; rather, he was held and tortured for the purpose of being held and tortured in and of itself."

Maybe partially true BUT

I believe they are treated as they are for the same basic reason as Mr. Waite. The US has to make every action seem reasonable therefore a positive "spin" is put on every inconsistency with past political and moral stances.

If we didn't spin we couldn't justify our lastest pronouncements of "Do what I say, not as I do."

"They can only be defeated by force. The root cause of their murderous acts is the desire to dominate others"

This is the exact same thing bin Laden and his followers and all terrorist say to the US.

Here you have a prime example of our moral duplicity.

In other words, we have exactly the same attitude we are punishing our enemy for having.

" I can recognise the conditions that prisoners are being kept in at the US camp at Guantanamo Bay because I have been there. Not to Cuba's Camp X-Ray, but to the darkened cell in Beirut that I occupied for five years. I was chained to a wall by my hands and feet; beaten on the soles of my feet with cable; denied all my human rights, and contact with my family for five years, and given no access to the outside world."

Mr. Waite, what the hell are you talking about?! These men are being held in safe, sanitary conditions with food and medical care even though they are suspected of planning terrorist attacks. Your statement shows a total disconnect from the reality of the situation. Are you are pushing an agenda? are you selling a book? is your brain low on protein? or are you truly an idiot?

Interesting, but mistreatment by design would be not merely a policy matter; it would be a felony, a violation of federal law and also the

Uniform Code of Military Justice (U.C.M.J.).

What you propose, is that members of the U.S. military, who are guarding the prisoners, are violating their duty --- and are so ordered.

That would mean that quite a lot of prosecution of such members of the U.S. military would follow, and probably also involve various "suits" in the Bush Administration.

That's quite a lot of risk to which such people are exposing themselves.

What the article above --- Mr. Waite's comments --- overlooks in the extreme, is the matter of how prisoners are required to be treated, in adherence to U.S. laws already on the books. People violating those laws is in very serious trouble --- that would include any idiot who has given orders, directly or inferred, to perform in a manner outside the law.

Re: moral use of force

"Here you have a prime example of our moral duplicity.
In other words, we have exactly the same attitude we are punishing our enemy for having."

The only justification for the use of force is to protect Freedom and individual rights. The US is engaged in a campaign to render the jihadist's campaign of murder and mayhem. The only way to neutralize a force is to oppose it with another force of sufficient magnitude.

The jihadist's actions are motivated by a desire to dictate to and direct the actions of the US. The US has no such desire to direct the actions of the jihadists other than to have them cease and desist in their criminal campaign of murder and mayhem. The moral map is clear, the US is right and the jihadists have gone beyond wrong, into the relm of pure evil.

But, the prisoners are indeed P.O.W.'s, prisoners of war.

WRONG!!

Under the clear text of the Geneva Convention they are NOT POWs.

They do not belong to a recognized military under national control, they do not wear distinctive uniforms or insignia, and they do not abide by the rules of war, (IE their chosen tactic is to sneak aboard airplanes dressed as civilians in order to crash them into buildings).

In NO WAY do they qualify as POWs, they are clearly terrorists, pirates, and brigands, and are being afforded remarkably lenient conditions considering that if let loose they would hijack or explode more jets at the first opportunity.

They have chosen to join the Al Qaida TERRORIST organization, not a military.

They are the "unlawful combatants" of 9-11.

Good discussion.

I'm having difficulty with the term "unlawful combatants". It begs the question, "unlawful according to what body of law?" Certainly what the terrorists did was against American law, but not against islamic law.

So if they did something against "our" law, but for "their" law, then our two countries must be at war.

Now I'm really going to have another beer!

"These (censored) thugs murdered thousands of Americans."

" Death is too good for them."

Funny! That is exactly the same thing bin Laden says about America.

"We have seen the enemy and they are us."

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.